摘要
马丁·海德格尔和米歇尔·福柯都是20世纪欧洲思想史上最伟大的哲学家,前者对后者的学术工作产生了重要影响,但二者思想观点的差异性亦非常明显。在艺术真理观方面,海德格尔以现象学的方法解读艺术作品,并认为真理被置入作品之中,大地与世界的争执而使艺术中的真理得以发生;他也预设了有本质直观能力的人存在并此人能凭此天赋开启真理。福柯以隐性的方式对海德格尔进行了批判,他关注真理的讲述方式,并认为真理即真理话语,它不仅构建了对象,也构建现代人。在分析《宫娥》、马奈的作品以及马格利特的《这不是一只烟斗》时,福柯并不关注绘画的再现秩序,而是要关注自我和物的历史关联(绘画话语),并由此解释绘画的本质起源时,让再现得以崩溃,并让绘画话语指向自身的物质实在性。总之,海德格尔预设了被形式限定的物的存在,而福柯则通过对绘画进行知识考古,回到了其自身的物质实在性,这要比海德格尔的真理观更实在,更澄澈,更具有现代性。
Martin Heidegger and Michel Foucualt are two of the most important philosophers in the history of twentiethcentury European thought.Foucault was influenced by Heidegger's thought.The difference between them was very obviously.Heidegger interpreted the artwork by phenomenology,and thought that the truth has been placed in the work,also that happened because of the dispute between world and earth.At the same time,he received that the human had the genius on the essential intuition and by that could open the truth in artwork.Foucault implicitly criticized Heidegger by focusing on the speaking way of truth,and thought the truth was truth discourse that did not only construct the work,but also the modern person.By analyzing Las Meninas,the lecture on Manet and This Is Not a Pipe by Margritte,he did not focus on the order of representation,but also on the relationship between the self and substance(painting discourse).According to Foucault,the representation was disintegrated through interpreting the origin of painting,and the painting discourse made us recognize the substance,by which the work has been existed.In short,Heidegger conceived the things has been defined by form,however,Foucuault tried to return to substance itself by the archaeological analysis of painting,that was more substantial,clearer and more modern.
出处
《艺术探索》
2019年第5期64-70,共7页
Arts Exploration
基金
2018年度重庆市社会科学规划项目“福柯的画论与20世纪艺术史学范式的转换”(2018PY92)
四川美术学院重大博士培育项目“福柯的画论与20世纪艺术史学范式的转换”(18BSPY005)
关键词
艺术真理观
物性
物质性
自由
Truth in Art Work
Thingness
Materiality
Freedom
